The Clar Hope Foundation has responded to a recent public statement by the Asset Recovery and Property Retrieval Taskforce (AREPT) regarding the City of Hope Academy matter, emphasizing its commitment to the rule of law while challenging the legality of a subpoena issued against it.
In a release signed by General Manager Jackson Paye Gbamie, the Foundation clarified that it is not opposing the State’s authority to investigate public assets and does not claim immunity from lawful scrutiny. It stressed that it supports accountability, transparency, and investigations conducted within the bounds of the law.
However, the Foundation said its ongoing court action specifically contests the legality of a Subpoena Duces Tecum obtained at AREPT’s request. According to the statement, the Foundation has filed a Motion to Quash the subpoena on the grounds that it was “procedurally defective, ultra vires, and issued in violation of established legal process.”
The organization argued that its objection does not stem from resistance to an investigation but rather from what it described as an unlawful and overly broad use of judicial process to obtain evidence. It further maintained that constitutional due-process safeguards must be upheld, warning that accountability and transparency cannot be achieved through unconstitutional means.
The Foundation also expressed concern that AREPT’s assurances of impartiality and respect for the judiciary conflict with its decision to pursue a subpoena that allegedly exceeds statutory authority. It added that references to a broader review involving multiple institutions do not legitimize what it considers an illegal instrument.
Reaffirming its position, the Clar Hope Foundation stated that it will fully cooperate with any investigation conducted in accordance with due process and statutory authority. Nonetheless, it rejected what it called the normalization of extra-legal or constitutionally defective subpoenas under the guise of asset recovery.
With the matter now before the court, the Foundation said it agrees with AREPT on allowing the judicial process to determine whether the subpoena and the evidence sought comply with Liberia’s Constitution and laws.
The Foundation concluded by urging restraint and respect for due process, underscoring that the rule of law must apply equally to both citizens and those responsible for enforcing it.
